From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF98FC47404 for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 22:19:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B23D6218AC for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 22:19:51 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="qeGmxHkx" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730815AbfJIWTv (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Oct 2019 18:19:51 -0400 Received: from mail-lf1-f46.google.com ([209.85.167.46]:33994 "EHLO mail-lf1-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1730809AbfJIWTv (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Oct 2019 18:19:51 -0400 Received: by mail-lf1-f46.google.com with SMTP id r22so2840995lfm.1 for ; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 15:19:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=6h6OhP36MJCgt2nSOIe3gxizFMtbFC9+kBnUPJ3vGeo=; b=qeGmxHkxuufzG7UFeB4rFx9hecDmxG8Chl0hL4bN5xsIzSVJy125SqQm5BISwhQWlz F4Dup6GmTbeN1BvQeuUcz9qjTHvHMo8Qcgu/h8kXXjWtY7cOWYp0W1Jiqs8sIbY9+78L ipJARB4cdzaZ2b8IaKFNXgEg4cpBrdwa2ZYZPnEMbNJw4FeAtavs+KOAIU6apjdsnTdm M2H4EnfS3LvaY8SCYp+Bc9SDcWpUkIlI6U+e53v3Na23y21P4Y7BoQ7fIb5AcDS6ugzq bu4MoOwGZIB7sxETCB8cuG2pahgZBqnggpmaf64IkPOAGgUk1fv1Iv97anJaOOH55QrM KQIg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=6h6OhP36MJCgt2nSOIe3gxizFMtbFC9+kBnUPJ3vGeo=; b=ZAWOiKwMaKdTQYziXksPnnlklEPJR6DtzTy4girp5fj1ZoNbaa9H+eCBunfD45iRkT 6Z+PLxkjpNtfDqLx4A2X2eukgJLmBKtgqoAANoVII6guByeHvHrMbimFK9l+6QvukRyd XgDH7NnjQC+F5k3FkZu9R5wubJkLQlnH2tBkLJVpXw6nJ0yC6SAvyKbbAtYPnWJ46g3w J8r9o42r76oPZTVwnSl0iyYhqJcs+3MyJTcmYutTADYV+NVAvBE8VZwifJ4I5nfD2wfc ErGeOqCX5Mc/1kIAuzmcBswFAVmzS0iHIkPwUTj2TPU3RjsPnNsAB9p3oDijUDvBb6ub 8Zvg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVEsTw1JWIEoKqjMCq5V/DY7XmDQifupmJMQLfZeDZ/0gIjZtAn T5iZakSGqofVjfEkKE+iTo4gqOfqq86jRe+/tuMnNQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzbOiIavJ961j4B+LgO6bW71FnixMm8veavh9Iq5PG4DuSTSfdmK+dyZ9yCCb83s5NwA8LgjN3sqMbo7bGJHfU= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:285:: with SMTP id j5mr3370007lfp.98.1570659588231; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 15:19:48 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190924182536.GC6041@hmswarspite.think-freely.org> <20191007.173329.2182256975398971437.davem@davemloft.net> <87zhicqhzg.fsf@dja-thinkpad.axtens.net> <20191007211704.6b555bb1@oasis.local.home> <20191008164309.mddbouqmbqipx2sx@redhat.com> <20191008131730.4da4c9c5@gandalf.local.home> <20191008173902.jbkzrqrwg43szgyz@redhat.com> <20191008190527.hprv53vhzvrvdnhm@chatter.i7.local> <20191009215416.o2cw6cns3xx3ampl@chatter.i7.local> <68faa5ef-6092-ea5f-191c-4b7713cb6ab2@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <68faa5ef-6092-ea5f-191c-4b7713cb6ab2@redhat.com> From: Dave Airlie Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 08:19:36 +1000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: thoughts on a Merge Request based development workflow To: Laura Abbott Cc: Konstantin Ryabitsev , Don Zickus , Steven Rostedt , Daniel Axtens , David Miller , Drew DeVault , Neil Horman , workflows@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: workflows-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: workflows@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 10 Oct 2019 at 08:09, Laura Abbott wrote: > > On 10/9/19 5:54 PM, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 05:35:39PM -0400, Laura Abbott wrote: > >>> This doesn't mean that forges are entirely out -- but they must remai= n mere tools that participate in a globally decentralized, developer-attest= able, self-archiving messaging service. Maybe let's call that "kernel devel= oper bus" or "kdbus" -- pretty sure that name hasn't been used before. > >>> > >> > >> The big issue I see with anything decentralized is that as things > >> grow people don't actually want to host their own infrastructure. > >> Think about the decline in the number of people who host their own > >> e-mail server. Anything decentralized would still presumably require > >> a server somewhere, so you're going to either raising the bar to entry > >> by requiring people to set up their own server or end up with people > >> still relying on a service somewhere. This feels like it ends up with > >> the situation we have today where most things are locally optimized > >> but on average the situation is still lousy. > >> > >> You've articulated you've articulated the reasons against centralizati= on > >> very well from an admin point of view (which I won't dispute) but at > >> least from a user point of view a centralized forge infrastructure is > >> great because I don't have to worry about it. My university/company > >> doesn't have to set anything up for me to contribute. I get we are > >> probably going to end up optimizing more for the maintainer here but > >> it's worth thinking about how we could get forge-like benefits where > >> most users don't have to run infrastructure. > > > > We're actually not in opposition to each-other -- I expect kernel.org > > (via Linux Foundation) would provide convenient bridge tools to cover t= he precise concern you mention. Think kind of like patchwork.kernel.org, bu= t instead of exclusively using some local database that only admins at kern= el.org have access to, it would provide a set of feeds allowing anyone else= to set up a fully functioning replica -- or participate in the process usi= ng their own compatible tools. > > > > So, in other words, the forge is still there and is still providing a v= aluable service, but it is not the single point of truth that can vanish an= d take invaluable data with it. That's my vision, and I think we have all w= e need to achieve it short of resolve, buy-in, and proper tooling. > > > > I'll admit I'm skeptical about the "participate with their own tools" > bit, simply because you end up with too many sides arguing about > standards and either n buggy implementations or effectively a single > implementation anyway. I'm with Laura, at the point where you have to write a fully qualified spec just so few people can keep their own workflows I feel you've taken things too far. Dave.